The first is the number of sample locations - 54. Compare that to the number of sites used by the four main climate centers - NASA GISS, Hadley Research Center, NOAA, and the Climatic Research Unit. They each use about 11,000 stations. Not convinced the analysis was correct, Richard Muller and the Berkeley Earth Project developed an entirely different set of stations and this one numbered over 39,000. Of note, the Berkeley Earth Project was hailed by deniers as legitimate research that would overturn global warming claims, until their research came out and confirmed the work of the other four centers.

Now, five centers are using tens of thousands of data points and they all come up with global warming, including one that started out to prove there is no such thing. You are not going to overturn their findings with just 54 data points.

And, the biggest issue I have with your claim is that it includes only the surface data. Why not the whole globe? Why is it that deniers keep insisting that 93% of global warming is not relevant? Where is the ocean data? Include the ocean data and increase your data set to at least a few thousand, then you might be able to make a claim. Of course, what you will find is that global warming is real and it is continuing.